Talk:Tiruchy L. Saravanan

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
More information about this article... ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

[edit] NPOV issues

This article seems a bit biased in favor of the subject. Should probably tone it down a bit, or at least give sources that he is the foremost of Ramani's students (among other claims). Powers 16:11, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Hello friend, nice to meet you again. Its so strange why out of all the people in the world, you are the only one challenging my contributions. Let me tell you again, I did NOT MENTION, that SARAVANAN is the FOREMOST, but among the foremost, and if that footage with Dr. N. Ramani is not good enough to convince you. Please visit his fan page at http://www.geocities.com/flutetls/index.html. There is no need to tone down here, he is the few flautists in India to win the Department of Culture Fellowship Award from the government of India. Help me check with the Department of Culture, http://indiaculture.nic.in/.

From my research, he has also won the 1990 All-India-Flute Competition first prize. I am trying hard for reliable sources, and since you are very sharp in criticising, please help me revive this highly talented musician by inquiring at the AIl-India-Radio for the details of the prize winners.

[edit] Disciples of Dr. Ramani

Saravanan is one of the foremost disciples of Dr. Ramani having truly the mastered and preserved the tradition of Dr. Ramani's music!

Unlike most contemporary musicians of North India who are promoted widely by several organisations in North India attention, most tradtional and highly talented artistes of Carnatic music rather stay away from the limelight, reason because, they are just too protective of the this sacred music which has survived 100s of centuries of foreign influences and bears the resemblance of the first music of India before Persian music came into North India and created Hindustani music. Another reason is, not enough media attention is brought over to the West from the south.

To truly understand, the only place you can find the genius of this musicians, you can only go to India and learnt about them, just like the legendary violin virtuoso, Lord Yehudi Menhuin, who experimented both Carnatic and Western violin techniques by studying in India and understanding the famous musicians of the trait in India, though deserving better world media attention truly respected them. One such brilliant Indian violin player was the legendary M. S. Gopalakrishnan, who playing the G string in one finger and even a played a piece of Bach on the violin! Interesting fact, but no web proofs. The proofs can only be found in great world musicians like multi-percussionist Pete Lockett, Mickey Hart, the Beatles, Jon Biggins and many influential Western musicians of the last century. The last resort would mean only a visit to India.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Harryl (talk • contribs) .

Um, to whom, exactly, are you referring? If it's I, I can assure you I'm not criticizing. I'm merely asking for some reliable sources. Powers 00:58, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Now that you have changed your text, my comment appears to make no sense. Thanks a lot. Here's the original quotation which caused my question: "Though there is no actual electronic information pertaining evidence pertaining to this, it would be better for critics to do some research rather than slamming an article. For hardliners, I think it would be better if you can discover and contribute!" Powers 16:40, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Please read Wikipedia:Verifiability and Wikipedia:Reliable sources. In short, if it hasn't been written down somewhere, we can't put it in an article. If these guys are as indescribable as you say, then we should not even have articles on them, since they are inherently unverifiable. Fortunately, I don't think that's true. But that still means we can only put verifiable information in the articles. Powers 16:42, 14 July 2006 (UTC)